“Aramm”… A textured portrait of village life turns into a shrill, message-heavy (and yet, important) drama

The line of female District Collectors in Tamil cinema isn’t a long one, and these women are usually seen in relation to their men. Janaki (Sowcar Janaki), in Iru Kodugal, became a Collector because she was rejected by her mother-in-law (and thus, lost her husband). In the 1960s, it was an either/or. You could either be a powerful woman or be in a relationship. You’d think things would have changed in the 80s, but it actually got worse in Aaniver, where Arukkani (Saritha), whose villager-husband suffered an inferiority complex, gave up her post and moved back to his village, because being his wife was more important than being the Collector. These films were battle-of-the-sexes relationship dramas, where the woman was punished, in a sense, for her ambition.

The most significant aspect of Aramm (Good Deed), written and directed by Gopi Nainar, is that Madhivadhani (Nayanthara) is defined only by her job. All we know about her is that she’s the Collector. Everything else — that she cares for people, that she has integrity, that she has a never-say-die attitude — is a function of her job. There are no parents in the picture, not even in a photograph at home — because we never see her home. The film’s locations are the places Madhivadhani needs to be in an official capacity. As for a husband or boyfriend, there’s no mention — and probably no need. Who needs a hero when the heroine can defy the corrupt MLA and walk away in slow motion?

Perhaps it’s better to know village life thru such movies, living in upper floors of a city apartment may cramp the legs, but you don’t get scared. If ever i get to live in a village, i would get nightmares of the hick mob coming with torches and pitchforks, collector or no collector. It’s also possible in the rocket village that they tie the slick smart ass to a homemade rocket and launch him back to some city penthouse.

It’s good to know that Ramachandran Durairaj has a meaty and effective role. I feared he would be typecast as a gangster due to Naan Mahaan Alla and Jigarthanda.

Apparently he was an assistant cinematographer under Vijay Milton and assistant director under Suseenthiran before being cast as Pey Babu in Naan Mahaan Alla which later led to his role in Jigarthanda. The scene where he slaps Oorni is LOL worthy. And I can’t forget his completely shaved appearance in Iraivi before “Onnu Rendu”.

Hard hitting inspite of the crudeness. Chopping off the news bits and even some portions of Kitty’s interrogation of Nayan would’ve made the movie much more effective. Quite a few beautiful initial scenes on the family, village, people and the surroundings. Even the initial administrative hullabaloo was very neatly told. This year’s “Joker” with a strong social issue. Sadly, these are the movies that should be creating a “Mersal” in the administration.

Baddy: Respectfully, I find this interesting: ‘There are no parents in the picture, not even in a photograph at home — because we never see her home’

In the Dunkirk thread, I felt many, possibly including yourself, held this against the protagonists – that there was no back story or connection about any of them that would have created a more emotional grip.. just sayin.. 😉

//In the Dunkirk thread, I felt many, possibly including yourself, held this against the protagonists – that there was no back story or connection about any of them that would have created a more emotional grip.. just sayin//

Vivek: That is because here we do not need an emotional connect with Mathivathini (Nayanthara). But we need our emotions invested with the little girl who is in danger and this has been ensured by the initial 20 to 30 minutes of the film when we get to know the life of the little girl and her family. Now imagine if straight away we were shown that the girl’s life was in danger and we never really knew about her. I do not think the movie might have established the connect with the audience which it has managed now.

Agree with you on the shrillness of the movie, BR (though, thankfully it didn’t tip to crudeness, like, say, Pasanga 2.)

But with the movie presenting an important truth in such a honest, hard-hitting way, its flaws can be overlooked, I think. Just like we watch a masala movie like Saami or Gilli with our ‘masala hat’ on, tuning down our ‘cinematic’ expectations, I feel, we need to train ourselves to put on a ‘message movie hat’ here on for such films. 🙂 (At least, that’s my takeaway.) These are stories that need to be told, and these are filmmakers who need to be encouraged.

The dialogues were a downside for me in this film – too dull and ineffective at many crucial places.

Another question the film raised was, how long are we going to keep blaming the government machinery? The tehsildars and councillors and the MLA’s – do they all not come from the people itself? The core problem is, for me, the self-centredness, the greed and apathy we see among men, rather than the government failing its people. There has been no dearth of schemes for uplifting the downgraded, from the days of independence. In other words, the social problems we face are all really humanistic ones, imo.

Hope someone makes a movie presenting these social issues from that angle. Would be more closer to truth.

doctorhari: I agree that the “worthiness” of a film is a factor, which is why this review is a fairly positive one (I hope it doesn’t come across as a pan). But I also think one should be able to separate this from a really well-made ‘message movie’ like Joker (which also had flaws, but was mostly beautifully done).

Or Manikandan’s films, which are little miracles of ‘message movie-making’. That’s the ideal way, really — you can take Kaaka Muttai as a critique of globalisation, or you can just view it as an boys’ own adventure story, where the goal is pizza. The ‘lecturing’ is beautifully folded into the dialogues, the situations.

Aramm did not come close — hence the observations.

With masala movies too, when I say ‘put your masala hat on,’ I mean, get into that MODE of movie-watching — not that we should excuse anything, just because it’s a masala movie 🙂

PS: In general, I’m saying that — depending on one’s perspective, of course — a film should be evaluated on what it sets out to do, and whether it does that thing well. And not just a ‘pat on the back’ kind of thing.

@Vivek: Since you brought Dunkirk into the conversation, I felt more claustrophobic watching/ experiencing Aramm than Dunkirk with all its budget and the big cinema experience that fake-IMAX lies that it gives.

@BR I am surprised you didn’t touch upon the fake lashes on Nayanthara this time around. Unlike Raja Rani, here she justifies her presence despite those distractions.

BR: Regarding the message-heavy tone of the film in the second half – I do agree with that but I guess there are two types of filmmakers. Someone who cannot be subtle and someone who opts to be loud on purpose. For example someone like Samuthirakani would be the former. But I think Gopi here is someone who can be subtle if he decides to. In this review too you have mentioned how you feel that the two halves might have been directed by two different persons. Might be a compromise to reach more people.

Bharath Vijayakumar: Of course, it may have been intentional to gradually increase the ‘shrillness quotient.’ But one can only view the film from your POV, right? A review is about the (perceived) quality of the film, not whether it reaches the masses…

BR: Manikandan is an accomplished, brilliant film maker, whose movies effortlessly straddle the fine line between social criticism and proper ‘cinema’. His films are, clearly, several notches above this as a cinematic experience, and they hardly crossed my mind while watching this.

The ‘message movie hat’ I talk about is for movies like these, where it’s really a social activist using the medium to convey a necessary message, which we hardly think about. (Some other films that come to mind here are ‘Appa’ by Samuthrakani, which was hardly great cinema, but has truly left a dent in many unthinking parent’s minds. Even Joker, for me, belongs partly to this category.) These are, for me, closer to the Michael Moore kind of documentary-films, rather than proper cinema. And my point is, we need not evaluate these activist-film makers against the accomplished ones like Manikandan.

However, I also recognise, as a film critic, that would be very difficult thing for you to do. But just saying. 🙂

I tend to like all your reviews and accepted it as a whole till now..But here, you experienced it as a pure cinema, and i didn’t. The portrayal of politicians,like you say, are neither over dramatic nor any botched up adding of masala! They are shown as how we(i hope i can include you) see them in real life. And yes, they leisure up their time more when they are needed the most on the ground. So here, there is no need for ‘what you called “politicians are pricks” banner’ as they are and they have been to us.No use in showing some good in them, as the good of them are well under the ocean!

And secondly, i would like to disagree with your point on reduced screen time for the melancholic parents of the child, because as you can see, the story is not about them, rather, it is to make us realize what we already know and what we chose to ignore. And to the climax part and some intricate scenes with cinematic-masala-moments, they played a vital and valiant part in delivering the crux of the story to the weekend-relaxing-movie going audience and made us take some part of the film with us…for to stay a long time in our hearts..to be prepared!

Some message-heavy movies should be allowed the courtesy of not bringing the sheer negatives to limelight!

BR
Assume the MLA of the constituency to which this village belongs to is locked up in Koovathur or Coorg, would he/she , pricked by conscience , stormed out of those luxurious resorts? Didn’t we see the legislators huddled in Bangalore all the way from Gujarat when the it ho.e state was reeling under floods? That tells the story.